Harvey Nash

I was supposed to be paid weekly, submitted timesheets in June, finally got a payment at end of August. Pension not paid to my SIPP as requested. Was paid into Aegon and took me another 6 months to get it in my SIPP. Then I get informed they had been hacked, still waiting for update on what info was lifted? Agency and UMB paying through the Netherlands to fiddle Corp Tax, I bet?

Used PayStream for umbrella over the past 8 months. Was happy with the service received, easy to talk to someone on the phone if you need it. Would recommend.

I should have been paid on 11 January, however no payment came through. No access to Parasol Portal, telephone, email, internet, web chat, no explanation or communication as to what is going on. Finally having contacted the agent several times, they feedback parasols has IT issues. Tonight I received a generic email from Parasol suggesting I can get a pay advance. NO, GIVE ME MY FULL WAGE. ALL PARASOL CHARGES MUST BE REFUNDED AS COMPENSATION FOR THE STRESS AND ANXIETY YOU CONTINUE TO CAUSE ESPECIALLY WHERE MY PERSONAL DATA MAY ALSO BE AT GREAT RISK. If this data breach is true I am sure a hefty fine and class action will follow.

Not been paid, literally zero communication unless you try to contact them and they have no useful information to provide. They do not know, or do not divulge what is going on and whilst apologetic they are doing nothing but stating they have a systems ‘outage’ for days now and payments will be made when systems are back up. I was forced to use this company - avoid like the plague if you can.

I've been with Parasol for just over a year and this week I have not been paid. All of their computer systems are down and they are deluged with customer support calls, so I can't get through to them and have no idea when I will be paid. They have ONE JOB to do and they can't do it! Parasol were on the preferred list of umbrella companies from my agency, but I would not recommend them. Unfortunately I think I'm stuck with them until my next contract.

Having been forced to work through Parasol and coming to the end of my contract I find their entire company has suddenly suffered some kind of IT outage which means they can’t pay me and can’t issue my P45. How are these thieves allowed to trade, let alone be on a preferred suppliers list for Harvey Nash? This is a disgrace and they have broken their contract with me and many other contractors.

For the second month in a row I have not been paid by this Umbrella. Utterly appalling. Today they left me a message from a restricted ID number to state they have issues and cannot confirm when I will be paid at all. I would never recommend Parasol they are appalling.

I was surprised to see some poor reviews as thus has not been my experience. I was with the Umbrella company before and it was a dreadful experience. I changed and went to Parasol. Really helpful, courteous and responsive. Big shout to Wayne and to Carl Leicester - absolutely brilliant service. Just a shame I won't ve with the comany fir long.

Hi all, I've had a very poor customer experience with Parasol as an umbrella (and also ClearSky, their accounting package). My takehome was poor, customer service was a litany of broken promises and they managed (somehow) to tax me twice in the same month. Make your minds up, but there are options out there

I'm not aware whether a tool was used but I do have an SDS determining my role as outside IR35 with the reason being: i am able to work for multiple clients: no mutual obligation: ability to provide a substitute. There was talk of contract length being linked to project stage gates but that hasn't happened yet, I have been offered a 6 month extension which would end 6-8 weeks before forecast project shut down. I'm not aware of any contractors leaving. Personally I'm relieved the assessment is Outside IR35 and will most likely sign the extension offered as the project is a great opportunity to develop by experience.

It looks like people who deliver training course for BP might be determined as outside. Forms are being filled in to go to PWC but contractors are not being asked for their input.

So, it looks like people who deliver training course for BP might get through this. IR35 Forms are being filled in to go to PWC but contractors not being asked for input. It’ll be interesting to see what the outcome is.

So, it looks like people who deliver training course for BP might get through this. IR35 Forms are being filled in to go to PWC but contractors not being asked for input. It’ll be interesting to see what the outcome is.

So, it looks like people who deliver training course for BP might get through this. IR35 Forms are being filled in to go to PWC but contractors not being asked for input. It’ll be interesting to see what the outcome is.

Contacted me about a role with an agreed day rate and confirmed the role was explicitly been offered outside IR35 on Feb 17, was offered the role on Mar 8, and was completely silent on the fact it was offered inside IR35 until specifically asked. Harvey Nash blamed their client for only notifying them the previous business day of a blanket ban on working outside of IR35. Gave no support on explaining why the role was advertised outside of IR35 and within 3 weeks changed and then provided high pressure to agree to work under an umbrella company with no explanation on the take-home impact (more than a third). Did not want to consider a role assessment using the HMRC tool. Loss of trust and goodwill from Harvey Nash. Also, I should add the agent didn't explain what happened to the BP hiring manager and also presented my CV without getting my permission beforehand. Get everything agreed upfront with the client and in writing. Don't accept day rate without contractual terms without seeing the draft contract and a role assessment for IR35 from Harvey Nash.

Feb 2020: be gone, scum of the earth March 2020: welcome, valued partners March 2021: be gone , scum of the earth Respectful treatment of suppliers? You decide.

Dialled into a call in December where we were told that NFUM will be using CEST. When it was suggested that they could use other tools, a statement was made to the effect of ‘they’ll all give the same result’. I get the impression that they think they can attract the same quality of contractor at the same day rate, albeit inside IR35. I haven’t seen an SDS, but then I have said that I won’t consider remaining in an inside IR35 status at the end of my current contract. Instead, I’ll be joining the rather large group of contractors playing musical chairs... I’ll take away my memories of a nice working environment, good people and hope that I may be able to return one day on an outside IR35 basis.

Deferred until 6 April 2021. BP took over a week to make a decision, leaving many hundreds of contractors in limbo, including some with contracts due to end 27 Mar. Harvey Nash almost 36hrs slower than other agencies to update contractors - first message contained misinformation. Still no communication from BP line manager so another week with nothing confirmed, and many people now with expired contracts. Additional stress, during an already exceptionally stressful time - coronavirus lockdown - which could have been avoided.

On reflection, have ‘decided to let each individual Contractor decide for themselves’...

Some existing roles are allowed to remain PSC. New hires are PAYE/umbrella only . Confirmed via job offer.

Communication from Harvey Nash TWO days after IR35 deferral announcement by Steven Barclay, and containing no information of any use. BP still in debate. Leaked internal email to line managers from country head implied loads of people have already switched to PAYE, which they haven't. It's not looking good. We've all been told by Harvey Nash that they will terminate our contracts next Friday, 27 March, even if they are due to run for much longer.

Extensions now being offered on an 'outside' basis. Contractors once again allowed to work through their own PSCs.

CEST was used and the results were provided to the individual contractors by both the client and the agency. The consensus is that contractors are being treated fairly and as a result no contractors are leaving.

Client using CEST to make individual assessments fairly, resulting in 'outside' determinations.

Disaster. BP won't increase rates to compensate for losses or pay the Employers' NI. Bernard Looney's shiny new world is already tarnished with the appalling way c.15,000 contractors are being treated. BP values are a sham. Project team is wrongly telling line managers BP is doing nothing different to any other organisation, (hence surprise when people say otherwise). LMs being told financial impact to individuals is negligible (try 30-40%...). Project directors in major panic as highly skilled people are walking (they're being told to replace them with people from IBM at 2-3 times the cost...). LMs still waiting for instructions from HR on what to do. HR don't know what to tell anyone. Contractors being told not to speak to BP LMs. BP LMs being told not to speak to contractors. LMs who are based abroad have no involvement in process at all. Harvey Nash treating contractors like dirt - lump it or get lost. Contracts being torn up on 27 March. Atmosphere is toxic. Comments being made by employees that contractors are tax avoiders / deserve what they get. Most awful professional experience in over 25 years

I lost my contract on Friday, it was terminated by Northgate

m

All contractors are inside IR35.

Blanket decision, we were told that only inside contracts will be available past 5th April

Assessed outside IR35 using CEST tool with no control being the main driver. Decision down to people leader having an understanding of how contractors operate as no proper guidance provided. May be a waste of time as recruitment freeze means contract extension on hold.

The one sided assessment is based on who for them is important in getting the things done and they have been kept Outside (IR35) saying they are not provided direction (even if no substitution provided) and they are on their own, where else the others are blanket-in by generic clauses of no substitution provided and require direction. Require direction - this is what needs to be done is what every contractor (be it a plumber, carpenter, mechanic or an IT person) needs to know to get on. How it needs to be done is upto the contractor and this is what many of the contractors were doing i.e. using individual expertise to get the job done. So putting a blanket-in just based on "What" is very flawed.

All current contractors are placed inside IR35, they are moving the IT to India and want contractors who are now outside IR35 to go away March 31st - uses CEST

Blanket ban enforced by termination of existing contracts

First poster's comments are spot on. Appears to be a blanket “inside” determination that has been issued. Only aware of contractors continuing to be engaged in an "outside" basis where they are working on an in-flight business critical migration programme. These contractors have neither provided a substitute, the reason given by the client for the general Inside determination but, as if by magic, the migration guys are outside. No conversation has been had with contractors prior to the determination being made. This is a real shame as Computershare generally seem to like don't things the right way and treat their employees/suppliers well. This is demonstrative of a blanket ban, apart from where it suits them. The grapevine is indicating that many people will be leaving. The sound of KPMG rubbing their hands together is almost deafening.

Issued a blanket “inside” determination sent via generic group email with no engagement with contractors. Assessment done by People and Tax teams with consultation from KPMG. Deemed inside due to not exercising right of substitution and deemed significant direction, control and supervision. To continue working with them must go through their preferred supplier Harvey Nash and must use one of Harvey Nash’s preferred umbrella companies. Choice of 6.

Contract extended for 3Months at a time until December. Renewed until end of Feb 2020 with no information on inside / outside etc past then

All contracts under review

I was told by the agency that the role is outside IR35, but I had to ask for reassurance. They did provide a CEST tool document showing how the decision was made.

PSCs definitely allowed. Most determinations inside but some coming outside. Almost looks like role based, not individual, determinations. Not enough information provided to managers to allow fair determinations.

Shambolic comms - typical Harvey Nash. PAYE or choice of five umbrella companies. Made it clear there will be NO negotiation on rate to compensate for losses. Notice period - immediate. Sham 'benefits' also charged out of day rate. Expect next message might be that we need to start paying THEM for the privilege to work there.

Found out on Twitter before Harvey Nash bothered to tell workers via email on 28 Jan. Appalling messaging entirely at odds with BP's values. Specific statement to say there will be no rate negotiations to compensate lost earnings - like it lump it. BP leaders seem to think this approach is normal & reasonable. BP Tax Dept had previously stated BP would assess individually. BP had no involvement in comms but left it to HN to ruin BP's client/contractor relationships. Brolly companies limited to 5, inc. HN's own brolly co. BP leaders seem to be shocked when shown financial impact for contractors, suggesting complete lack of awareness of what this means in practice.

Blanket ban on PSC

Informed a CEST assessment was completed, 2 options presented, umbrella or terminate contract. Right to appeal decision was offered.

Official communication has been issued internally to confirm this blanket approach to all contractors.

Advice the people leaders are being given by their HR departments is to assess based on “how things work at the moment”. This approach with very little guidance from the HR department will almost certainly ensure a 95% chance of contractors being inside. HR are leaving it to the individual people leaders to determine whether they wish to engage in a different manner, given the institutionalisation of the majority of the people leaders I find this counter productive and will result in significant loses.

No official communication yet

Sat down with HR. CEST said I was out, but I was ’referred’ as my role is being blanket assessed as inside. Other contractors who gave the same answers were deemed outside as they had a different role.